From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC6D6288AD for ; Wed, 17 Dec 2025 05:57:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765951064; cv=none; b=QpjOJLGo0GG1PS0bBI27cVrTY81q/OtvF9Uy5eA4qVb9FwxqwS0Vo+wYYILbfduVPcuWRwGqRIw+aES24XctHdwI0t6bn2iXpT2RhI3W7YqLU1JLXGy/bDV1Vhi6ne5ww6cN2AnBytwMoFBZwX7YR9olUno5V+2KlxMWBbPYIEI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765951064; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KFTAFw/YrSyP9qcnrSP+UfETMqtZY074AgBYSnqTx1c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=S8BQ7hIOuMd1V3ZxnGTAI38dSzBd5AkLM5zwYshXF7+mPLmdYg0vjOTBxsTEeg05Xx7h4xO1iz2B0RRlEnPNVg6f5riTP76dWwPF7F4poNIfdR+aj9HMoAnk/TLtVpzNyN4o2JBVpM18Gy4/je85E5H1KeYOLQt9ljLtmpfdfr8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=EoF+Eofz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="EoF+Eofz" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 61719C4CEF5; Wed, 17 Dec 2025 05:57:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1765951064; bh=KFTAFw/YrSyP9qcnrSP+UfETMqtZY074AgBYSnqTx1c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=EoF+EofzaiyfhclK5l6A5Sn7NzsLIKtlU2ZL7WZcLaWwc70PY3Cpm0gcSmzYfA649 OeRaYbuztgJAACkj2znQmJSzFPFskLbZqk1dwo8ZyKCejmG8iEirnIEcRajtX48l/1 NzadaH6Kv1cfjL73xXVweoZ+BJjR3dIKQqj+SQ1cYLinVp8jZB2bSIGUNfVX678vZu MSNIgw1ysu/aYrENmxI2j6I9ZcEQjBXwxoQYZUfNTPBNlAjFlxbzgaFGsK0X9sK6g7 uclt12ATZwUNp0OZPO0aHkRV9cvvIH6dO5ORr7nyXtuBajG+UHYmix4poPW23ZcPTg oOw45bEctwyuw== Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 21:57:43 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: "Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, ritesh.list@gmail.com, ojaswin@linux.ibm.com, hch@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] xfs: Fix the return value of xfs_rtcopy_summary() Message-ID: <20251217055743.GT7725@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 11:07:42AM +0530, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote: > xfs_rtcopy_summary() should return the appropriate error code > instead of always returning 0. The caller of this function which is > xfs_growfs_rt_bmblock() is already handling the error. > > Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy (IBM) Looks pretty broken to me... Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" --D > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > index 6907e871fa15..bc88b965e909 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_rtalloc.c > @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ xfs_rtcopy_summary( > error = 0; > out: > xfs_rtbuf_cache_relse(oargs); > - return 0; > + return error; > } > /* > * Mark an extent specified by start and len allocated. > -- > 2.43.5 > >